| Title |
Convergent validity of the interRAI-HC for societal costs estimates in comparison with the RUD Lite instrument in community dwelling older adults
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Health Services Research, August 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12913-016-1702-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Lisanne I. van Lier, Henriëtte G. van der Roest, Hein P. J. van Hout, Liza van Eenoo, Anja Declercq, Vjenka Garms-Homolová, Graziano Onder, Harriet Finne-Soveri, Pálmi V. Jónsson, Cees M. P. M. Hertogh, Judith. E. Bosmans |
| Abstract |
The interRAI-Home Care (interRAI-HC) instrument is commonly used in routine care to assess care and service needs, resource utilisation and health outcomes of community dwelling home care clients. Potentially, the interRAI-HC can also be used to calculate societal costs in economic evaluations. The purpose of this study was to assess the convergent validity of the interRAI-HC instrument in comparison with the RUD Lite instrument for the calculation of societal costs among care-dependent community dwelling older adults. A within-subject design was used. Participants were 65 years and older and received professional community care in five countries. The RUD Lite was administered by trained (research) nurses or self-reports within 4 weeks after the interRAI-HC assessment. Agreement between the interRAI-HC and RUD Lite estimates was assessed using Spearman's correlation coefficients. We hypothesised that there was strong correlation (Spearman's ρ > 0.5) between resource utilisation estimates, costs of care estimates and total societal cost estimates derived from both instruments. Strong correlation was found between RUD Lite and interRAI-HC resource utilisation assessments for eight out of ten resource utilisation items. Total societal costs according to the RUD Lite were statistically significantly lower than according to the interRAI-HC (mean difference €-804, 95 % CI -1340; -269). The correlation between the instruments for total societal costs and all six cost categories was strong. The interRAI-HC has good convergent validity as compared with the RUD-Lite instrument to estimate societal cost of resource utilisation in community dwelling older adults. Since interRAI-HC assessments are part of routine care in many community care organisations and countries already, this finding may increase the feasibility of performing economic evaluations among community dwelling older adults. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Belgium | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 43 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 43 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 6 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 7% |
| Other | 9 | 21% |
| Unknown | 10 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 11 | 26% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 10 | 23% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 7% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 2 | 5% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 4 | 9% |
| Unknown | 12 | 28% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 09 September 2016.
All research outputs
#12,845,361
of 22,883,326 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#4,224
of 7,651 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#170,653
of 340,306 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#143
of 248 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,883,326 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,651 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.7. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 340,306 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 248 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.